<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2014 (3) TMI 372 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244917</link>
    <description>Refund under Notification No. 41/2007-Service Tax could not be denied for terminal handling charges, CHA services, and storage and warehousing charges where service tax had been paid, the services were used for export activity, and the services fell within the notification. On that basis, the claim was held admissible and the denial of refund was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2014 07:18:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=348332" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (3) TMI 372 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244917</link>
      <description>Refund under Notification No. 41/2007-Service Tax could not be denied for terminal handling charges, CHA services, and storage and warehousing charges where service tax had been paid, the services were used for export activity, and the services fell within the notification. On that basis, the claim was held admissible and the denial of refund was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244917</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>